Redevelopment of Greenwich Hospital (Concept)

As a resident of Northwood for the last 30 years, I am strongly opposed
to plans to redevelop Greenwich Hospital site.
The surrounding area on the south side of River Road is a quiet
residential neighbourhood mainly one and two storey detached housing.
The hospital development will overshadow the whole region, dominating
the skyline, destroying the outlook for many homes, damaging Gore
Creek and the bushland areas and increasing noise and pollution for
everyone.
The access to the hospital is by bus or car. With 300 plus car spaces
being planned plus large number of residents to live on site there
will be a huge increase in traffic on River Road - currently a one
lane road in the westerly direction which leads to lane cove shopping
"village". Any road widening would involve the railway bridge plus
destruction of bush and waterways around Gore Creek plus increased
noise and disruption for all surrounding residents.
Currently the right hand turn from Northwood road onto River Road is
quite dangerous. It will become a death trap.
There is no need for the construction for anymore "seniors" units as
there are already plans for a great number on the corner of Greenwich
Road and RIver Road and 160 plus at 266 Longueville Road and a
Pathways development near by.
Finally I do not appreciate being advised of this development without
any opportunity for the community to discuss the plans with Hammond
Care prior to two huge files of development papers being put on
display for a VERY limited time.
I am opposed to this development.

I am opposed to this development.
It will dominate the skyline and overshadow the total suburban
environment including residents who enjoy the bushland views from
Upper Cliff Road and the area of Gore Creek Park.
Such a development will add to much stress upon the surrounding
bushland.
Aside from that the increase in population will further go to
increasing traffic in the area which has already got limited access
and traffic congestion.
There have already been plans approved to build senior housing in
nearby locations and this location is totally inappropriate for
seniors with its topography and bushfire risk.

I support updating the hospital and adding a residential care village and
seniors housing. i am concerned about the size of the new development.
My concerns are as follows: 1. The site is zoned SP2 which is
designated infrastructure - health services, by the LCC therefore
residential high rise should not be included.
All the surrounding area is zoned R1 which has a height restriction of
9.5m. I am concerned the development and will tower over the local
communities and cause overshadowing of the Bob Campbell Oval.
2. I am also concerned about the removal of 50 established trees.

I would like to record an objection based on an impression that the
proposal is an over development. The six storey apartment blocks would
be of unprecedented height in Greenwich south of River Road. The site
would lose a significant proportion of its flora.

This is a new residential development and seems to be avoiding the
normal community input that normally comes with such developments. It
is on a hospital site but it is not clear what the relationship, if
any, is to the hospital.

I would ask that the development be reconsidered.

I object to this development, there are too many housing developments in
the Lane Cove / Greenwich area. There is no investment in the roads,
schools, services, parks etc for all the extra people.

I object to the Greenwich Hospital proposal. It will create too much
traffic in the street where children walk to and from the local
school.

I strongly object to the proposed development at Greenwich Hospital. It
is out of character with our area and highly destructive.

People choose to live on the North Shore for many reasons, not least
amongst which is the trees. The proposed development will cost 50
trees. After the hottest summer on record, with soaring temperatures
and a drought of historic magnitude, a proposal to reduce the number
of trees in the area is preposterous.

Please don't give yet another site to rapacious, destructive
development.

I object to the scale of this proposed development, which I think is too
large for the area, which is residential and with a primary school
across the road. I also understand that the proposal will involve
large scale destruction of trees, which would be a great loss to our
neighbourhood.

I object to the proposed Significant Development SSD 17_8699 - Greenwich
Hospital, 97 - 115 River Rd Greenwich for a number of reasons:
1) the current site is a hospital site and operated in that capacity
for over 50 years, and while development and refurbishment should be
expected over periods of time, it should not include what is
effectively the construction of a retirement village. This
furthermore, reduces the available land for future hospital expansion
for what is now proposed residential accommodation.
2) the proposed development looks to be more of a medium density
residential development, not bound by the appropriate rules governing
such
3) it is not in keeping with the character of the suburb
4) there is no precedent for the proposed height of construction on
River Rd west of Greenwich Rd - and this will be an eye-sore seen by
the existing occupiers of properties in Greenwich
5) the bulk and scale of the development is not sympathetic to the
suburb as a whole or the immediate neighbours to the proposed
development
6) the development appears to be bypassing legislated application
processes, aimed at protecting the interests of the local community
and occupants.
7) the proposal requires the elimination of vast numbers of
established trees which forever changes the look, feel and aesthetics
of the site, the suburb and both the north and south neighbouring
areas of River Rd.

My residential property at ### River Rd is directly opposite the planned
hospital. Currently the site is well-screened with both trees and an
elevated footpath which provides a green leafy visual barrier along
the River Rd facing front of the property opposite my premises.

I am concerned that the concept photographs suggest that the site will
be lowered to abut River Rd directly. I would like reassurance that
the boundary will remain concealed behind the retaining wall with the
footpath running along the top and screened from River Road and my
property by the existing or an increased number of trees.

Should such screening not be part of the plans, then I object to the
development.

The height of the buildings should not allow for any line of sight
into my back yard.
I would be happy to discuss my concerns further.

Thank you for the opportunity to make comment.

I have examined the plans and I know the site well. The proposed
development does not respect the community and street pattern, in
particular, the scale and proportions of the buildings would be
entirely out of the character. If approved, it will be a detriment of
the community of Greenwich & Northwood. I wish to object strongly to
the development as it will:
1. increase the traffic on River Road. At present, the existing road
(River Road) is very congested. It is inadequate to accommodate the
communities morning and afternoon traffic. Also, these congestions
often result in a car accident (especially around the corner of River
Road & St Vincent. In addition, I would like to point out the safety
of young school children. Hence, it will not / cannot accommodate
construction and visitors.
2. ruin the character of Greenwich and Northwood. There will be more
noises and outsiders entering and exiting. Greenwich is a small, quiet
and family orientated suburb. This is why my family & I decided to
settle here.
3. not allow privacy for the resident of Greenwich and Northwood (by
the high elevation and additional dwelling)
4. reduce the availability of public transport - My family and I rely
very heavily on the existing bus route of 261 & 254. At peak time
there are limited spaces on the bus. Sometime, I or a member of my
family will have to wait for another bus, as the bus was too full.
5. impact Gore Creek and the nearby reserve, including wildlife
habitats and trees.

I have examined the plans and I know the site very well, as I pass
HammondCare every day. I believe that the proposed development does
not respect the community. The layout, in particular, the scale and
proportions of the buildings would be entirely out of the character. I
wish to object to the development as it will:
1. increase the traffic on River Road. At present, the existing road
(River Road) is very congested as it is inadequate to accommodate the
communities morning and afternoon traffic. Also, these congestions
often result in a car accident (especially around the corner of River
Road & St Vincent Road). The additional traffic increase safety school
children and the community. Hence, it will not / cannot accommodate
construction and visitors.
2. ruin the character of Greenwich and Northwood. There will be more
noises and outsiders entering & exiting. Greenwich & Northwood are a
small, friendly, peaceful and family orientated suburb. This is why my
family & I decided to settle here.
3. not allow privacy for the resident of Greenwich and Northwood (by
the high elevation and additional dwelling)
4. reduce the availability of public transport. My family and I rely
very heavily on the existing bus service of 261 & 254. At peak time
the bus is very crowded. Most of the time, I or a member of my family
are not able to get on as it is too full.
5. impact Gore Creek and the nearby reserve, including wildlife
habitats and trees.

If approved, it will be a detriment of the community of Greenwich &
Northwood.

I object to the development as the height and size make it too big for
this residential area. The bushland will be lost forever and school
children will be at danger from both construction and increased
traffic. The local community shops can also not deal with so many
extra people living in the area. The parking in my area is already
very difficult with people parking across my driveway frequently. I do
not object to the hospital redevelopment, just the development of high
rise residential living units on the block.

I strongly object to the Proposed Staged Redevelopment of Greenwich
Hospital (Concept Proposal). My objection is based on the following
key points:

1. The overall height and scale of the proposed development, in
particular the proposed 7 story seniors' living apartment buildings,
is completely inappropriate for a largely residential and bushland
area.

2. The assertion in the EIS that "The proposed development is
appropriately located and proportioned and will assist in creating
visual interest and contribute to public amenity" is clearly written
from the developer's perspective and takes no account of the
significant adverse impact on nearby residents. I assert that the
visual impact will not be in any way "interesting" and the development
will not provide any amenity for local residents.

3. The increase in traffic and congestion associated with the
overdevelopment of the site will significantly impact local residents
and will place children at Greenwich Public School at far greater
risk.

4. The green corridor provided by the significant established trees on
the Greenwich Hospital site contribute to the residential bushland
landscape and create an effective noise barrier and pollution filter
between the traffic on Greenwich Road and the residents directly to
the south of Greenwich Hospital. The removal of approximately 50% of
the established trees to allow for the construction of buildings and
additional car parking is completely inappropriate.

5. While the refurbishment and redevelopment of the health services at
Greenwich Hospital as a State Significant Development is
understandable, the development of over 80 new seniors' residential
apartments plus 9 blocks of villas should be evaluated separately
under the same rules that apply to any commercial property development
application.

The Applicant's submission itself states that "The proposed
development is predominantly a hospital campus with a main hospital
facility that includes inpatient hospital beds, palliative care beds,
residential care beds and outpatient services." Even a cursory review
of the application shows this not to be an accurate representation of
the facts.

The proposed seniors' living units are quite simply a stand alone
commercial property development and have absolutely no relationship to
the redevelopment of Greenwich Hospital and I most vigorously refute
the Applicant's conclusion that "The associated seniors living units
are an integral part of the hospital campus and the HammondCare
`continuum of care' model".

6. The Applicant's paucity of consultation with the local community
demonstrates a complete lack of care or concern about the impact of
the development on local residents.

I object to the development of Greenwich Hospital as it is an
inappropriate development for this residential area. The proposed
development of buildings are too big and too high for this particular
site. As importantly, the development proposes the loss of significant
bushland which will fundamentally change the character of the area.
The proximity to Greenwich Public School also means that school
children will be at danger from both construction works and increased
traffic around the site.

I object to the development as its impact on the bushland is too
significant especially in light of other development occurring in the
Lane Cove area. I also object to the addition of so much additional
residential development and consider that there is sufficient
residential development to cater for independent aged living already
in the Lane Cove area.

We wish to lodge an objection against the Staged Redevelopment of
Greenwich Hospital.

As Northwood residents, living in sight of the proposed redevelopment,
we recognise that we could simplistically be categorised as NIMBYs.

As such, we have endeavoured to assess the proposal objectively and
not allow any parochial considerations to interfere with or override
that aim.

In addition to being a neighbour, we have had two firsthand
experiences with the site as an existing hospital.

A close relative recently spent four weeks in Greenwich as a
rehabilitation patient. We saw much of the hospital first hand, and
recognise and acknowledge that a significant overhaul is well overdue.
As such, we have no in principle objections to a new or refurbished
single purpose hospital.

Our second experience with the existing Greenwich Hospital has been as
the close friend of a palliative care patient. This highlighted to us
the unique nature and requirements of a hospital specialising in
palliative care. Specifically, our experience was that relatives and
friends invariably spend extended periods in and immediately around
the hospital. The importance of space, along with a peaceful and
pleasant garden environment in close proximity to the hospital was
pivotal. The current plans would suggest that with an additional 82
residential apartments spread over two high-rise apartment buildings
planned, plus a further 9 blocks of villas, this feature will
disappear. This situation will be further exacerbated by the
widespread removal of existing mature trees.

In summary, a new or refurbished medical or health services facility
on a site currently zoned for such purposes would seem reasonable. A
major residential development, with relatively small accompanying area
allocated for a hospital, would seem totally inappropriate -
especially as it falls well outside the present zoning for the site.

Further concerns for us are the impacts on the surrounding area.

The first concern is an obvious one; traffic. With River Road already
regularly gridlocked at critical times of the day, the impact of
vehicles belonging to, and servicing a further 82 apartments (plus the
9 blocks of villas) will be self-apparent.

We are also worried about the potential impact on the existing Gore
Creek Bushland Reserve and hospital surrounds. In conjunction with
Lane Cove Council, a number of local residents (including ourselves)
have worked for a number of years to preserve and rehabilitate the
existing bushland. Such areas are so important to the health and
wellbeing of the city and local community. As such, anything that
jeopardises this green corridor should be subject to the strictest
scrutiny, before any development proceeds.

Finally, the visual impact of the project is one that will be of
concern for all impacted Northwood residents, along with anyone
enjoying both Bob Campbell Oval and the Gore Creek Bushland Reserve.
We have seen a photo mock-up of the development, as it currently
stands, and the impact is significant. Replacing the current pleasant
mix of bushland, residential houses and hospital, will be a massive
residential block that will absolutely dominate the skyline.

We would be happy to elaborate further on any of the above points, if
this were to be of any assistance.

In the meantime, we appreciate the opportunity to have provided some
input into the process.

I am a local.This will effect my property immensely. I object to another
horrendous high rise going up in this area. The hospital is needed.
How dare it be removed for more housing. Stick to St Leonards area.

Dear Sir/Madam

The zoning SP2 under the Lane Cove LEP 2009 states that the permitted
uses with consent are the uses outlined in the zoning map being
'health services and incidental and ancillary uses' to the primary
use. In my opinion, Seniors Living is neither an ancillary nor an
incidental use to the primary use of health care as seniors living can
be undertaken on any land zoned Residential in NSW and does not need
to be next to or part of any health related development.

Most seniors living developments are stand alone developments that are
undertaken independently of any health related development or service.
In fact to live in a seniors living development you are not required
to have any health issues whatsoever, you just need to be over the age
of 55 years and you can live there along with your family who can be
of any age and in perfect health as well.

I know people in their mid 50's in perfect health with perfectly
healthy children under the age of 10 who reside in Seniors Living
complexes. What does that have to do with health related services ?
Absolutely nothing.

Therefore in my opinion, HammondCare should not be permitted to build
seniors living on the site as it is neither an incidental nor an
ancillary service to the health services at Greenwich Hospital.

Furthermore, by using a large chunk of the land for non health related
development, HammondCare are in fact removing the possibility for the
future use of that land to be used for the exact purpose to which it
is zoned and meant to be used (health services).

I have been a volunteer at Pallcare, Greenwich for several years, and I
also take my therapy dog to Riverglen every two weeks.
I have always been extremely impressed with the quality of care at
this hospital, and I believe that should this application be granted,
this care could be extended in an area of care that is at present in
great need, and which will be even more so in the future.